The court has concluded its session. Before sentencing, I was told that the plaintiff had provided new evidence and wanted to reopen the trial. Is it okay?

Of course, until the verdict comes out. The law does not stipulate that the court session can only be held once. Complex cases have been opened more than a dozen times.

The judge has the right to decide whether to limit the final time limit for giving evidence according to the case.

According to the new civil procedure law. In fact, even the evidence submitted after the judgment of the first instance should be adopted if the court of second instance thinks that it has really affected the final decision.

If it is submitted before the judgment of the first instance, there is no cross-examination in the first instance, which causes the other party to appeal to the second instance. Then the first trial is illegal and wrong.

Only after the judgment of the first instance is made. Of course, the procedure of first instance is not illegal, but if the sentence is changed, the second instance will still use new evidence and new facts to change the sentence. Losses caused by delay in giving evidence, such as legal fees, shall be borne by the other party.